Kiyoharu Sakakibara

Summary. This paper examines whether Tyssedal’s working definitions of work can be extended to the evaluation of good work. It distinguishes identifying what counts as work from assessing its quality, and identifies two overlooked semantic elements: workers’ attitudes toward their activities and their social and institutional status. Retaining Tyssedal’s account of the scope of work, it proposes additional evaluative conditions concerning opportunities for meaning or satisfaction, appropriate social conditions, adequate remuneration, and workloads that are not disproportionately excessive. The framework also offers a conceptual basis for debates on migrant worker admission. These conditions remain provisional; their precise standards and relative weights require further normative argument.

Summary. This paper identifies an emergence problem within relational egalitarianism: individually free choices can unintentionally generate dominating social norms, while intervention against those norms can itself restrict freedom of choice. It argues that existing liberal and fair relational egalitarian approaches do not adequately resolve this tension. Justificatory Relational Egalitarianism shifts attention to whether institutions and social norms can be justified as equally respecting everyone’s status as an autonomous agent. Freedom of choice and freedom as social standing are treated as adjustable means to securing that status. The paper proposes three responses: securing meaningful options to depart from prevailing norms, institutionally expressing respect, and cultivating an egalitarian ethos. These provide normative guidance rather than a complete elimination of emergent inequality or an empirical demonstration of policy effectiveness.

Summary. This paper distinguishes backward-looking recognition of work already performed from forward-looking recognition of individuals’ choices of work for self-realization. Within a relational egalitarian framework, it argues that forward-looking recognition must be secured before evaluating past achievements. It identifies three institutional aims: meaningful access to work choices, affirmation of those choices through the messages institutions express, and support for practices of mutual recognition. Basic income is defended as an institutional basis for these aims, securing resources independently of work and helping challenge practices that devalue particular work choices.

Summary. This paper defends unconditional and uniform basic income as a distributive principle grounded in equal respect for moral agents. It argues that such respect requires both a diverse range of options and the protection of self-respect. An adequate income without work requirements supports choices directed toward self-realization, while uniform payments avoid eligibility assessments that can undermine self-respect. The paper addresses objections concerning free riding and demands to vary payments according to ability, income, or circumstances. Its focus is the normative desirability of basic income within ideal theory.

Review of Shin Osawa, Shigoto no Seigi (2025).

Review of Shintaro Tamate, Koshu Eisei no Rinrigaku (2022).

Japanese edition: Keiso Shobo, 2026. Chapter 7 translated by Kiyoharu Sakakibara.

Japanese edition: Keiso Shobo, 2025. Kiyoharu Sakakibara is one of the translators.